Headlines

Michael Barone

I was wrong where it counted

What happened? I think fundamentals were trumped by mechanics and, to a lesser extent, by demographics.

The Obama campaign strategists—and congratulations to them, by the way—argued that they would win by organizing and turning out the vote in the key states that would determine the outcome of the election. They had no illusions that they could expand the president’s appeal beyond the 53% of the popular vote of the 365/359 electoral votes they won in 2008; on the contrary, they conceded Indiana’s 11 electoral votes and the single electoral vote of the Nebraska 2nd congressional district even before the campaign started. They didn’t contest the 15 electoral votes of North Carolina very much after holding the 2012 Democratic National Convention there; they concentrated in their pre-convention negative anti-Romney advertising and in their organizational efforts on a three-state firewall of the next three states in order of Obama 2008 percentage, Florida (29 electoral votes), Ohio (18) and Virginia (13).

After Obama’s disastrous performance, and Romney’s sparkling performance, in the October 3 debate, it looked like the firewall was crumbling. But it seems to have held.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Yeah, I’m down too but not to sound too dramatic my grandparents fought in Europe and the Pacific. My late Dad served in Korea and Vietnam. Various other uncles served as well. Hell, my Mom was a WAM (wide-assed Marine).

My prediction for a 50/50 Romney loss was made months ago and the election played out exactly as I said it would at the time. A billion dollars of propaganda couldn’t overcome Romney’s record as a leader of the gun-grabbing movement and the grandfather of Obamacare.

Okay, look. Barone was wrong but most ALL the polls we’re accurate. No disinterested observer would have predicted a Romney victory in the past week because there was no public data supporting that assertion.

Isn’t that awesome. He’s sorry. So is Dick Morris and George Will and how did we get those polls so terribly wrong, darn it? Golly gee I don’t know. But I sure do feel like an azz for believing a word out of your stupid mouth. Can’t wait for your article on appeasement.

Well, I’d say he was ginning up support because it would have been stupid to despair with Obama’s margins in the polls so narrow. You better believe that the liberal pundits would have been doing the same as Will, Barone, and Morris if Obama was down 5 in the states he needed, much less the -2 that Romney was polling.

On the other hand, this is a pretty legitimate mea culpa, so who knows, maybe he actually believed it.

Actually he missed something different. There was a SMALLER turnout among Republicans than what McCain received in 2008. (Maybe Romney needed Palin on his ticket!) All this talk of major shifts is just noise. Romney did not bring out the base. Think about that simple fact.

Isn’t that awesome. He’s sorry. So is Dick Morris and George Will and how did we get those polls so terribly wrong, darn it? Golly gee I don’t know. But I sure do feel like an azz for believing a word out of your stupid mouth. Can’t wait for your article on appeasement.

magicbeans on November 7, 2012 at 5:23 PM

NEVER believe the pundits! really, allways look at averages like the RCP. i learned my lesson in past election cycles…

Moving forward, here’s something to consider when weighing the relative value to place on different election prognosticators: if Nate Silver, for example, had been horribly wrong, his reputation, and career, would be irrevocably harmed.

Michael Barone, Karl Rove, and the Redstate crew are all going to continue drawing the same paychecks no matter how full of sh*t they were.

It’s too painful for Conservative slaves to deal with that. They’d rather blame “bad candidates” or “the media” or “the 47%’ers” than to deal with the simple fact that their Ayatollahs gave them a deeply flawed candidate.

Actually he missed something different. There was a SMALLER turnout among Republicans than what McCain received in 2008. (Maybe Romney needed Palin on his ticket!) All this talk of major shifts is just noise. Romney did not bring out the base. Think about that simple fact.

Actually he missed something different. There was a SMALLER turnout among Republicans than what McCain received in 2008. (Maybe Romney needed Palin on his ticket!) All this talk of major shifts is just noise. Romney did not bring out the base. Think about that simple fact.

Freddy on November 7, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Exactly, if the Same base McCain/Palin turned out voted he probably would’ve barely won.

Had that happened and no Sandy/Christie he may have won big like Barone predicted.

I appreciate the uplift but it’s still a little fresh. This one was different than ’08. With McCain, we knew going into the booth. This time, people were confident for the last six weeks or so. It was in the bag. The reality was a sucker punch.

It’s over, we move on.

I’m emotionally and mentally spent. As a matter of fact, I just listened to Chris Matthews tell people that the biggest reason Obama won was because of the storm. He finally got to look presidential. 24 hours ago I would be screaming.

It’s all upside down and it takes a lot to fight it from all sides. I think we all need to take our own time to exhale a little and then start again.

Moving forward, here’s something to consider when weighing the relative value to place on different election prognosticators: if Nate Silver, for example, had been horribly wrong, his reputation, and career, would be irrevocably harmed.

Michael Barone, Karl Rove, and the Redstate crew are all going to continue drawing the same paychecks no matter how full of sh*t they were.

Armin Tamzarian on November 7, 2012 at 5:30 PM

indeed, nate silver is an obnoxious nerd that only has his correct predictions to feed him, while these right wing pundits will keep going win or fail their predictions.

They weren’t full of it, it was reasonable to conclude that Romney would atleast get the McCain vote and the Hurricane effect was hard to predict.

jp on November 7, 2012 at 5:35 PM

“Hurricane effect” my ass. The polls (and poll whizzes, and betting houses, and prediction markets) were calling this election months ago. Sandy might have helped in coastal swing states like Florida and Virginia, but you could subtract both of those from Obama’s EV total and he would still have easily won. Does anyone seriously think Sandy helped Obama take land-locked swing states like Colorado, Nevada, or Iowa? Get real.

I don’t believe he failed to motivate the base. Four years of Obama + Romney’s good debate performance + Ryan was plenty motivation. I really think a lot of old white people who were alive four years ago just died and nobody took their places.

It doesn’t matter! The election results would be the same if Barone had never made a prediction.

a capella on November 7, 2012 at 5:28 PM

I knew Barone, as well as Rove and Morris, were stepping into quicksand when they all predicted the same thing.

It wasn’t just all of the idiot Republican voters who stayed home again this time (even more of them than in 2008!) but it’s also important to remember that as Limbaugh correctly predicted, O’bamna went even more after the low IQ voter in 2012 than he did in 2008, when he won an at the time record 70% of that group.

Yesterday, according to CNN exit polling, Dear Leader set another new alltime record, getting 82% of the HS dropouts in Pennsylvania along with 80% in California. He also got 73% in Nevada.

Exactly – for Conservatives, Willard was nothing more than the “lesser of two evils” – and that’s not enough for them get up and vote.

HondaV65 on November 7, 2012 at 5:28 PM

According to an exit poll mentioned here yesterday before polls had closed Romney was winning independents by a wide margin. He must have lost Republican voters by an even wider margin or else he would have won. Earlier in the primaries Rush Limbaugh warned that this could happen, but when I listened today Rush makes it sound like Romney is the perfect conservative candidate. If Rush is right that Romney isn’t the problem then conservatism itself must be the problem, (from Rush’s confused point of view). Maybe it’s time for Rush to hang it up and we can get some people on the radio who will try to get along with Ron Paul supporters and rebuild the tea party coalition so we can win again like we did in ’10, rather than with losers like Rove, Barone and Krauthammer, who worked for Mondale and Carter, and Rove worked for Bush who is almost as bad.

I think Fox News and NY/DC GOP media lost this election.

That’s going to suck if Rush has irreparably succumbed to the Romney fiction. I liked him for a few years during the tea party glory days and only stopped listening when he maliciously smeared Ron Paul and his supporters and split the tea party.

My prediction for a 50/50 Romney loss was made months ago and the election played out exactly as I said it would at the time. A billion dollars of propaganda couldn’t overcome Romney’s record as a leader of the gun-grabbing movement and the grandfather of Obamacare.

FloatingRock on November 7, 2012 at 5:20 PM

You keep posting this self-praise. You are very proud of your correct guess. You seem to feel as if it is an important accomplishment.

I’m going to go out on a limb here, but I think that the Tom Bradley Effect has been at work here, but with religion rather than race. People don’t want to admit to pollsters that they won’t vote for a Mormon. So the polls, especially for enthusiasm, are artificially high.

Can’t control the Hurricane, but Romney would’ve won had we turned out our base and we did not.
jp on November 7, 2012 at 5:26 PM

That tends to happen when one trashes the base — much like the Palin fans that got trashed here. Speaking of which, where is csdeven? In seclusion in grammy’s basement? It might as well stay there as we roll up our sleeves and go to work

I’m going to go out on a limb here, but I think that the Tom Bradley Effect has been at work here, but with religion rather than race. People don’t want to admit to pollsters that they won’t vote for a Mormon. So the polls, especially for enthusiasm, are artificially high.

RINOs are people too on November 7, 2012 at 7:02 PM

In fact, now that we see that Romney didn’t even reach McCain levels from 08 — that is one of the more reasonable deductions one can make.

“The Mormon issue” was under the surface — but, as it turns out — clearly a factor. Sad. Hope you bigots are happy.